Stinson v. Schmidt et al, No. 2:2020cv00187 - Document 10 (E.D. Ark. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER adopting 8 proposed findings and recommendations; dismissing this case without prejudice because Mark Stinson's amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; counting this dismissal as a strike; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 11/23/2020. (kdr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Stinson v. Schmidt et al Doc. 10 Case 2:20-cv-00187-BSM Document 10 Filed 11/23/20 Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION MARK STINSON REG #29908-076 v. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 2:20-CV-00187-BSM B. SCHMIDT, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER After de novo review of the record, United States Magistrate Judge Jerome Kearney’s proposed findings and recommendations [Doc. No. 8] are adopted. This case is dismissed without prejudice because Mark Stinson’s amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The dismissal constitutes a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. section 1915(g) and, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1915(a)(3), it is certified that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 23rd day of November, 2020. ________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
